方法学研究:开放性问题、“关于研究的研究”的必要性及其对循证卫生保健和减少研究浪费的影响。

L. Puljak
{"title":"方法学研究:开放性问题、“关于研究的研究”的必要性及其对循证卫生保健和减少研究浪费的影响。","authors":"L. Puljak","doi":"10.1097/XEB.0000000000000201","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"With the ever increasing pace of research reports published, a new type of study has emerged, in which researchers analyze research practices and provide methodological guidance for the future. The overall aims of such studies are to explore planning, conduct, reporting, dissemination, and evaluation of research, and to provide recommendations for their improvement. A myriad of studies have shown that studies are planned, conducted and reported in a suboptimal way, and that there is ample room for improvement. It has been suggested that studies with inadequate planning, conduct and reporting represent avoidable research waste, causing enormous waste of funds and researchers’ efforts, and yielding suboptimal research reports. Methodological studies represent research efforts that may help in reducing research waste, and therefore should be welcomed as a valuable contribution that may contribute to production of better evidence and justify investments in research. However, there are multiple open questions about what exactly is analyzed in such studies, which collective name we should use for them, what type of study designs can be considered methodological studies, are they synonymous with systematic reviews and metaanalyses (SR/MA), and so on. Methodological studies may be observational or interventional. The unit of analysis in observational methodological studies can be broadly described as a research-related report. Such reports can be very diverse, including, but not limited to, study protocols, datasets, full reports with data analyses, and summary formats such as abstracts, plain language summaries, and so on. These reports may or may not be published in peerreviewed literature. Some of those research-related reports that are not published in peer-reviewed literature are available online, including materials posted in registries and repositories, or organizational web sites. Interventional methodological studies explore various interventions for improving research.","PeriodicalId":55996,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Evidence-Based Healthcare","volume":"116 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Methodological research: open questions, the need for 'research on research' and its implications for evidence-based health care and reducing research waste.\",\"authors\":\"L. Puljak\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/XEB.0000000000000201\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"With the ever increasing pace of research reports published, a new type of study has emerged, in which researchers analyze research practices and provide methodological guidance for the future. The overall aims of such studies are to explore planning, conduct, reporting, dissemination, and evaluation of research, and to provide recommendations for their improvement. A myriad of studies have shown that studies are planned, conducted and reported in a suboptimal way, and that there is ample room for improvement. It has been suggested that studies with inadequate planning, conduct and reporting represent avoidable research waste, causing enormous waste of funds and researchers’ efforts, and yielding suboptimal research reports. Methodological studies represent research efforts that may help in reducing research waste, and therefore should be welcomed as a valuable contribution that may contribute to production of better evidence and justify investments in research. However, there are multiple open questions about what exactly is analyzed in such studies, which collective name we should use for them, what type of study designs can be considered methodological studies, are they synonymous with systematic reviews and metaanalyses (SR/MA), and so on. Methodological studies may be observational or interventional. The unit of analysis in observational methodological studies can be broadly described as a research-related report. Such reports can be very diverse, including, but not limited to, study protocols, datasets, full reports with data analyses, and summary formats such as abstracts, plain language summaries, and so on. These reports may or may not be published in peerreviewed literature. Some of those research-related reports that are not published in peer-reviewed literature are available online, including materials posted in registries and repositories, or organizational web sites. Interventional methodological studies explore various interventions for improving research.\",\"PeriodicalId\":55996,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Evidence-Based Healthcare\",\"volume\":\"116 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Evidence-Based Healthcare\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/XEB.0000000000000201\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Evidence-Based Healthcare","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/XEB.0000000000000201","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

摘要

随着研究报告发表速度的不断加快,出现了一种新的研究类型,即研究人员对研究实践进行分析,并为未来提供方法指导。这些研究的总体目标是探讨研究的规划、实施、报告、传播和评价,并为改进这些研究提出建议。无数的研究表明,研究的计划、执行和报告都不是最理想的方式,还有很大的改进空间。有人认为,规划、实施和报告不充分的研究是可以避免的研究浪费,造成资金和研究人员努力的巨大浪费,并产生不理想的研究报告。方法学研究代表着可能有助于减少研究浪费的研究努力,因此应该受到欢迎,因为它可能有助于产生更好的证据并证明研究投资的合理性。然而,在这些研究中究竟分析了什么,我们应该为它们使用哪个集体名称,什么类型的研究设计可以被认为是方法学研究,它们是否等同于系统评价和荟萃分析(SR/MA),等等,都有许多悬而未决的问题。方法学研究可以是观察性的或干预性的。观察方法学研究中的分析单元可以广义地描述为与研究相关的报告。这样的报告可以非常多样化,包括但不限于研究协议、数据集、带有数据分析的完整报告,以及摘要格式(如摘要、普通语言摘要等)。这些报告可能会也可能不会发表在同行评议的文献中。一些未在同行评议文献中发表的与研究相关的报告可在网上获得,包括发布在注册和存储库或组织网站上的材料。干预方法学研究探索各种干预措施以改进研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Methodological research: open questions, the need for 'research on research' and its implications for evidence-based health care and reducing research waste.
With the ever increasing pace of research reports published, a new type of study has emerged, in which researchers analyze research practices and provide methodological guidance for the future. The overall aims of such studies are to explore planning, conduct, reporting, dissemination, and evaluation of research, and to provide recommendations for their improvement. A myriad of studies have shown that studies are planned, conducted and reported in a suboptimal way, and that there is ample room for improvement. It has been suggested that studies with inadequate planning, conduct and reporting represent avoidable research waste, causing enormous waste of funds and researchers’ efforts, and yielding suboptimal research reports. Methodological studies represent research efforts that may help in reducing research waste, and therefore should be welcomed as a valuable contribution that may contribute to production of better evidence and justify investments in research. However, there are multiple open questions about what exactly is analyzed in such studies, which collective name we should use for them, what type of study designs can be considered methodological studies, are they synonymous with systematic reviews and metaanalyses (SR/MA), and so on. Methodological studies may be observational or interventional. The unit of analysis in observational methodological studies can be broadly described as a research-related report. Such reports can be very diverse, including, but not limited to, study protocols, datasets, full reports with data analyses, and summary formats such as abstracts, plain language summaries, and so on. These reports may or may not be published in peerreviewed literature. Some of those research-related reports that are not published in peer-reviewed literature are available online, including materials posted in registries and repositories, or organizational web sites. Interventional methodological studies explore various interventions for improving research.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
39
期刊介绍: ​​The International Journal of Evidence-Based Healthcare is the official journal of the Joanna Briggs Institute. It is a fully refereed journal that publishes manuscripts relating to evidence-based medicine and evidence-based practice. It publishes papers containing reliable evidence to assist health professionals in their evaluation and decision-making, and to inform health professionals, students and researchers of outcomes, debates and developments in evidence-based medicine and healthcare. ​ The journal provides a unique home for publication of systematic reviews (quantitative, qualitative, mixed methods, economic, scoping and prevalence) and implementation projects including the synthesis, transfer and utilisation of evidence in clinical practice. Original scholarly work relating to the synthesis (translation science), transfer (distribution) and utilization (implementation science and evaluation) of evidence to inform multidisciplinary healthcare practice is considered for publication. The journal also publishes original scholarly commentary pieces relating to the generation and synthesis of evidence for practice and quality improvement, the use and evaluation of evidence in practice, and the process of conducting systematic reviews (methodology) which covers quantitative, qualitative, mixed methods, economic, scoping and prevalence methods. In addition, the journal’s content includes implementation projects including the transfer and utilisation of evidence in clinical practice as well as providing a forum for the debate of issues surrounding evidence-based healthcare.
期刊最新文献
Quality of reporting in abstracts of clinical trials using physical activity interventions: a cross-sectional analysis using the CONSORT for Abstracts Perceived impact of a one-week journalology training course on scientific reporting competencies: prospective survey Artificial intelligence in health and science: an introspection A relação entre linguagem e práticas pseudocientíficas Prevalence of Diabetes Mellitus among individuals with chronic kidney disease: systematic review and meta-analysis
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1